Question 105·Hard·Inferences
Historian Lena Ortiz contends that the latest published edition of polar explorer Magnus Elling’s 1912 field journals presents a skewed narrative of the expedition. Ortiz notes that the editor excised several weeks of entries in which Elling detailed navigational errors and confessed to moments of paralyzing self-doubt. Because the edited volume is marketed as uncut and authoritative, Ortiz warns that readers are likely to _____
Which choice most logically completes the text?
For “complete the text” inference questions, first paraphrase the sentence up to the blank in your own words, focusing on cause-and-effect: what is happening, and what is the likely result or concern? Predict, in simple language, what logically belongs in the blank (for example, “readers will get an overly perfect picture of him”). Then scan the choices and eliminate any that require readers to know information they don’t have, introduce new topics not in the passage, or describe ideal behavior instead of the likely mistake. Finally, choose the option that most closely matches your prediction without adding extra unsupported ideas.
Hints
Focus on what is removed
Look closely at what the editor cut out of the journals—what kinds of moments are missing from the published version, and how would that change the story a reader sees?
Use the phrase “uncut and authoritative”
Ask yourself: if a book is advertised as complete and trustworthy, will most readers question it, or will they accept what they read as the full truth?
Think about the distortion, not ideal behavior
Ortiz is warning about what readers are likely to do, not what careful readers should do. What kind of mistaken impression might an average reader form from a version of the journals that leaves out important struggles?
Eliminate answers that add new ideas
Cross out any options that depend on readers noticing omissions, judging the editor’s motives, or using ideas (like modern exploration practices) that the passage never mentions.
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand Ortiz’s main complaint
Ortiz says the new edition of Elling’s journals gives a “skewed narrative” because the editor removed several weeks of entries where Elling admits navigational errors and paralyzing self-doubt.
So: the published version leaves out his mistakes and doubts, but still presents itself as reliable.
Use the key phrase about how the book is marketed
The edition is marketed as “uncut and authoritative”. That means:
- Readers are told it is complete (nothing missing).
- Readers are told it is trustworthy.
So typical readers will not suspect anything is missing and will trust the version they see.
Infer what readers’ misunderstanding will be
Combine the two ideas:
- The book omits entries showing Elling’s errors and self-doubt.
- Readers believe they are getting the full, authoritative record.
Therefore, readers will form a picture of Elling based only on the surviving entries, which do not show those doubts and mistakes. Their impression of him will be distorted in a specific way: it will make him seem steadier and more assured than he really was.
Match that inference to the answer choices
Now compare each option:
- Some choices talk about readers becoming more skeptical or analyzing the editor, which doesn’t fit with them trusting an “uncut and authoritative” edition they don’t know is missing content.
- Another choice brings in a new idea (modern vs. historical lens) that the passage never mentions.
- Only one choice matches the logical consequence of removing all the error-and-self-doubt entries: readers will think Elling was always confident and decisive and will miss the uncertainties that actually shaped his journey.
So the best completion is: “perceive Elling as consistently confident and decisive, overlooking the uncertainties that shaped his journey.”